Sitting of 9 June 1865

MINUTES.
SUPPLY—CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES—considered in Committee.—CLASS IV.—EDUCATION, SCIENCE, AND ART—REVENUE DEPARTMENT.
PUBLIC BILLS—Committee—Prisons (re-comm.) [141].
Report—Prisons (re-comm.) [141].
Withdrawn—Writs Registration (Scotland) [48], [The Lord Advocate].
The House met at Twelve of the clock.

PRISONS (re-committed) BILL.

  [BILL 141.] COMMITTEE.
  Order for Committee read.
  Bill considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  Clauses 1 to 14, inclusive, agreed to.
  Clause 15 (Superannuation of Officers.)
  SIR MINTO FARQUHARsaid, he wished to recognize the principle, that after a service for a certain period, and at a certain age, officers should be entitled to have their claims to superannuation considered by the visiting magistrates. He therefore proposed, that after the word "prison" in line 31, there should be inserted "has been an officer for not less than twenty years, and not less than fifty years of age." The clause, as he proposed to amend it, would be precisely similar to a clause in the Lunatic Asylums' Acts.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, that the officers employed under the Lunacy Act were men of peculiar qualifications, and there was a special recommendation that they should be put on a better footing with regard to superannuation than any other class. If the Amendment were adopted a claim would be made to extend the same terms to the officers of convict prisons, and then to other officers of the Civil Service. The clause had been very carefully considered by the Select Committee, and

  1329
  he thought it would be undesirable to make the change in it that was proposed by the hon. Baronet. If, however, a provision of this kind were to be inserted in the Bill, fifty years was too early an age at which to entitle an officer to an allowance. If the word "sixty" were substituted for "fifty" no great inconvenience would arise from the adoption of the Amendment, and he would not oppose it, A man of fifty years of age might be well able to continue to discharge his duty, and he did not see why he should be superannuated at that age. The age for superannuation under the Police Act was sixty.
  MR. HENLEYsaid, that the clause had been fully considered by the Select Committee, and was almost unanimously agreed to. He would not object to superannuation at sixty, but should prefer the clause as it stood.
  SIR MINTO FARQUHARwould accept the suggestion of the Home Secretary.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Clause, as amended, agreed to.
  Clauses 16 to 18, inclusive, agreed to.
  Clause 19 (Requisitions of Act as to Hard Labour.)
  MR. MITFORDsaid, that in many small prisons some of the prisoners were employed as cooks and nurses. Would not this be properly considered as "bodily labour" of the second class?
  SIR GEORGE GREYdid not think that employment either as cooks or nurses came under the description of hard labour. Baking really was hard labour, and might be so considered. The Select Committee were of opinion that it was undesirable to exempt prisoners from some description of hard labour when hard labour formed a portion of the sentence. There were always hard labour prisoners unable to do hard work, and these might be employed in cooking and nursing.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clause 20 agreed to.
  Clause 21 (Rules in addition to Regulations in Schedule.)
  MR. BARROWinquired whether the rules to be made by the justices would, after this Bill passed, sufficiently empower the governors of prisons to alter the diet as a mode of punishment in the case of mild offenders.
  SIR GEORGE GREYbelieved that the governor exercised that power at present. His power of punishing for certain offences by close confinement was limited to three days; but in the case of trifling punishments he clearly would have the same power that he had at present under the direction and control of the justices.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clause 22 (Inspectors of Prisons to leave a Minute of Observations.)
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, that the object of this clause was a very desirable one—namely, that when an Inspector examined a prison and found defects in it, these defects should not be kept concealed from the immediate notice of the visiting justices until the annual Report had been laid before Parliament. The clause, therefore, provided that when an Inspector found any irregularities to exist in a prison, he should make a report on the subject to the visiting justices; but as it might be inconvenient to oblige an Inspector on every occasion of this kind to make a report, he proposed to amend the clause by the insertion of words enabling the Inspector to call attention by letter addressed to the visiting justices to any irregularities that he observed to exist in prisons, so that they might take measures for remedying them. He proposed, therefore, to leave out the words "make a report on the state of the prisons," and insert the words "call their attention to any irregularity he may have observed."
  MR. HENLEYcould not see a great difference between "making a report," as it stood in the clause, and "calling attention," according to the Amendment. Remarks of Prison Inspectors ought not to be made carelessly or loosely, and when made, on mature consideration, they ought to be matter of record.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Clause, as amended, agreed to.
  Clauses 23 to 41, inclusive, agreed to.
  Clause 42 (Allowance to discharged Prisoners.)
  MR. MUNDYsaid, he should desire to see the principle of this clause still further extended. It was a subject of just complaint that when a prisoner was discharged from prison he was almost obliged to relapse into crime, because he had no means of obtaining a subsistence. He would grant, therefore, to every prisoner, on leav-

  1331
  ing prison, a certain proportion of the earnings he made during his incarceration, and thus give him a chance, if he chose to do so, of returning to an honest course of life. In many foreign prisons the principle had been adopted, and it had been stated that in the Canton de Vaud, in Switzerland, the prisoners on being discharged from them received as much as two-thirds of their earnings.
  SIR BALDWIN LEIGHTONwould like to know how the earnings of each prisoner were to be ascertained and calculated? In scarcely one gaol that he knew were there any real earnings. He believed there were charities in most gaols from which prisoners might be assisted with small sums on their discharge.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, that this was no new enactment, but was copied from an existing Act. It had not been long in operation, but it was working well, and it would be undesirable to alter or repeal it without further experience of its operation.
  MR. MUNDY: How far can you go beyond £2 at present?
  SIR GEORGE GREY: You cannot go beyond £2 at all.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clause 43 to 52, inclusive, agreed to.
  Clause 53 (Appointment of Visiting Justices.)
  SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEasked what was the reason of limiting the number of visiting justices to twelve. In the larger districts there would be an advantage in having a greater number than twelve. He moved to leave out the words "not exceeding twelve."
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, that the majority of the Select Committee were favourable to this limitation of the number of visiting justices, in the belief that the smaller the number the greater the responsibility. For himself, he rather doubted the expediency of the limit to any particular number.
  COLONEL STUARTsuggested the substitution of "eighteen" for "twelve."
  MR. HENLEYthought it would be much better to leave the number open, and let each county do as it thought best.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Clause agreed to.
  Remaining clauses agreed to.
  Schedule 1. (Regulations for Government of Prisons.)
  Section 29. "The hair of a female prisoner shall not be cut without her consent, except on account of vermin or dirt, or when the surgeon deems it requisite on the ground of health; and the hair of male prisoners shall not be cut closer than may be necessary for the purpose of health and cleanliness."
  MR. MUNDYsaid, that female prisoners were sometimes so disorderly that it was necessary the visiting justices should have the power of cutting off their hair as a punishment. He should not wish to see it carried out; but where female prisoners set the authority of the prison officers at defiance, and destroyed their clothes and everything they could lay their hands upon, the threat of cutting off their hair might be usefully held over them in terrorem. He moved, as an Amendment, after the word "health," to insert "or under the sanction of the visiting justices as a punishment in extreme cases."
  Amendment proposed, after the word "health," to insert the words "or under the sanction of the visiting justices as a punishment in cases of refractory conduct in prison."—(Mr. Mundy.)
  SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEsaid, it occasionally happened that the visiting justices had a class of female prisoners on their hands who were very difficult to deal with. When they were disorderly the justices could not inflict corporal punishment, and the only punishments they could carry out were a reduction of diet and confinement in a dark cell. The punishment of cutting off their hair was the most effective of all, and he should vote for the Amendment.
  MR. BRISCOEsaid, that to cut off the hair of a female prisoner was the most cruel and severe punishment that could be inflicted on a woman. He should divide the House against the Amendment.
  MR. ADDERLEYbelieved that this punishment was one which it was necessary the justices should possess in certain cases.
  MR. BARROW, from his experience as a visiting justice, would vote for the Amendment. He knew a case in which a profligate woman was confined in prison who defied the authority of the gaolers, and sang obscene songs at the top of her voice for a couple of days. He believed that the fear of this punishment was necessary to deter women of that class from such excesses.
  SIR BALDWIN LEIGHTONsaid, that the present punishment for disorderly female prisoners was quite insufficient. In the prison in his county a strong, handsome girl of twenty was confined. She had previously been in Chester and two or three other prisons, and she at length came to Millbank, and her story was given in the Revelations of a Prison Matron. This girl attacked the female officers of his (Sir Baldwin Leighton's) county prison, tore down the grate and a portion of the walls, and the visiting justices were at their wits' end to know what to do with her. The matron was obliged to keep her bed for two days in consequence of her violence, and the girl was fourteen days in irons before she would bog anybody's pardon. She knew they could not cut off her hair, but if that punishment could have been inflicted it would not have been necessary to handcuff her—the threat would have been enough. In another case in his county a woman told the matron she knew they could not flog her. The matron was about to leave the prison, not for any fault, but because she was going to be married. What she did was perfectly illegal, but it was quite effectual—she went into the woman's cell, and herself gave her an exceedingly sound whipping, and the woman was never disorderly again. If the visiting justices could have cut off these women's hair the threat would have been enough, and they would not have had to punish either of them.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, that the Amendment gave the power in "extreme cases." This was vague, and he doubted, moreover, whether it would be a deterrent. He had no great objection, however, to give the power to the visiting justices if the offence were more exactly defined.
  MR. HENLEYsaid, that the power of cutting off women's hair used to be exercised in prisons and workhouses, but it had very properly been given up. In some ill-managed prisons every case would be an "extreme case," and the women would all be docked. This would be an act of the greatest cruelty. It was a heavier punishment than could be now inflicted on a woman. Half of the women in gaol would rather have twelve months' imprisonment than have their hair cut. He would vote for the clause as it stood.
  MR. HUNTsaid, he was desirous that the justices should have the power of inflicting the punishment; but, at the same time, he should not like to see it done. He
  1334
  suggested that instead of "extreme cases" the words of the Amendment should run "in cases of refractory conduct in prisons."
  MR. MUNDYsaid, he would accept the suggestion of his hon. Friend.
  Question put, "That those words be there inserted."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 22; Noes 39: Majority 17.
  MR. MUNDY MR. MUNDY moved an Amendment to the effect that the hair of no boy should be cut close when imprisoned for a first offence. He mentioned an instance in which a boy who had had his hair so cut was unable from that circumstance to get employment after he left prison.
  MR. WRIGHTSONsaid, that the power of cutting off the hair of lads was very useful. Sometimes, when they obstinately refused to pay small fines, they gave way and paid the money as soon as the barber came into the room.
  MR. MUNDYobjected to cutting off the hair of any boy who might be imprisoned for a first offence. It prevented a lad from getting employment.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, that the object of cutting the hair close was cleanliness, and that very much the same thing was done in the army.
  Amendment negatived.
  Section agreed to.
  Section 34 (Regulations as to Hard Labour of the First Class.)
  MR. CAVEpointed out that in small gaols there would be no one available for nursing and cooking except prisoners sentenced to hard labour. He submitted that well-conducted prisoners sentenced to hard labour of the second class might be employed in the duties of nursing and cooking, or else the smaller gaols would be without nurses and cooks. He entirely agreed with the hon. Member for Midhurst (Mr. Mitford) on this point, and hoped the Government would concede it.
  SIR GEORGE GREYthought it would be better that the hon. Gentleman should give notice of his Amendment, that the Members of the Select Committee might have an opportunity of stating the grounds on which they framed the regulations as they stand in the Schedule.
  MR. CAVEsaid, he would bring up a clause on the Report.
  Section agreed to.
  Clause 47 (Ministers to visit Prisons under certain Restrictions.)
  MR. MUNDY MR. MUNDY moved to leave out "shall" and insert "may."
  SIR GEORGE GREYcould not agree to leave the matter to the discretion of the justices. The clause took away the necessity of a special request in each case.
  SIR WILLIAM JOLLIFFEwished to leave the justices no discretion in such a matter, so that no prisoner need be excluded from religious instruction.
  MR. BARROWsaid, that in his county they got hold of a London burglar who at first declared himself to be a member of the Established Church, and then, wishing to give the authorities some trouble, represented that he was a Roman Catholic.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, that under this Bill the statement made by a prisoner on entering a gaol as to his religious persuasion would be taken down, and would hold good during his term of imprisonment.
  Remainder of the schedule, with verbal amendments, agreed to.
  Schedules 2 and 3 agreed to.
  House resumed.
  Bill reported; as amended, to be considered on Monday next.

CASE OF WALTER CRAYTHORNE.

  QUESTION.
  MR. COXsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If his attention has been called to the sentence passed by the Rev. W. Wales, at Uppingham, on a lad named Walter Craythorne, of twenty - one days imprisonment, with hard labour, for absenting himself for a short time from the service of his master, Mr. Needham, notwithstanding Mr. Needham entreated that a week's imprisonment only should be given the lad?
  SIR GEORGE GREY, in reply, said his attention had not been called to the subject, as no complaint or representation had been made to him about it. If any were made to him he would inquire into it.

NAVY—SIR RICHARD BROMLEY.

  QUESTION.
  SIR JOHN PAKINGTONsaid, he wished to ask when the papers which were moved for some days ago by the hon. Member for Stamford (Sir Stafford North-cote), relating to the case of Sir Richard
  1336
  Bromley), will be laid upon the table. They were exceedingly short, and he could see no reason why they had not already been produced. It was necessary that the papers should be in the hands of Members before proceeding to discuss the Motion of which he (Sir John Pakington) had given notice?
  MR. CHILDERSreplied that the papers should be laid on the table shortly.

ARMY—CASE OF LIEUTENANT COLONEL DAWKINS.—QUESTION.
MR. DARBY GRIFFITHsaid, he would beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War, Whether it is the intention of the military anthorities to take any official notice of the letter published by Lieutenant Colonel Dawkins' on the 1st June, contradicting the statements respecting his case which have been put forward by those authorities?
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON: Sir, the letter referred to by the hon. Gentleman was addressed to the Editor of The Times, and was published in that newspaper on the 1st of June. I have not had an opportunity, since the hon. Gentleman placed his Notice upon the paper, of consulting either the Secretary for War or the Commander-in-Chief on the subject; but I believe it would be quite unprecedented that any official notice should be taken by the military authorities of a letter addressed not to them but to a newspaper. I can, therefore, safely inform the hon. Gentleman that no official notice has been taken of that letter, which contained statements in reply to my speech on Lieutenant Colonel Dawkins's case that do not in any way affect the Secretary for War or the Commander-in-Chief. I alone am responsible for the statements in that speech, and after consulting all the documents to which I have access, I still believe them to be substantially accurate. The hon. Gentleman may feel assured that it is not my intention to enter into any correspondence with Lieutenant Colonel Dawkins on the subject. I am quite content to allow hon. Gentlemen who still take an interest in Lieutenant Colonel Dawkins's case to judge whether there is any substantial difference between that gentleman's statements and mine.
MR. DARBY GRIFFITHsaid, he supposed he might take it that the noble Lord's statements were not made upon the authority of either the Secretary for War or the Commander-in-Chief.
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON: I am personally responsible for any statements contained in my speech.

WRITS REGISTRATION (SCOTLAND) BILL— [The Lord Advocate]— [BILL 48.]
On Order for resuming Adjourned Debate on Amendment on going into Committee [2nd June].
MR. GRANT DUFFasked the Lord Advocate what course he proposed to take in reference to this Bill.
THE LORD ADVOCATEsaid, he found that though he had received the support of the majority of the Scotch Members in regard to the Bill, yet the opposition was so formidable that he had no hope of carrying the measure this Session, and he therefore intended to withdraw it. The question, however, had gained very much by being amply discussed, and in a future Session he hoped that the Scotch representatives would be more unanimous on the matter. He moved that the order he now read, and discharged.
Order of the Day read, and discharged.
Bill withdrawn.

ACCIDENT ON THE GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY.—QUESTION.
SIR WILLIAM GALLWEYsaid, referring to an accident which occurred the other day upon the Great Western Railway, he wished to ask the President of the Board of Trade, Whether he would use his authority, or, if he had no authority, his influence to prevent for the future the locking of the doors of railway carriages, a custom which was in reality only adhered to for the convenience of railway companies, and which was most dangerous to the traveling public?
SIR LAWRENCE PALKsaid, he had given notice that he meant to call attention to this subject upon going; into Supply.
MR. MILNER GIBSONsaid, that the Board of Trade bad no authority on this matter, but if any representation was made to them it would, of course, be their duty to communicate with the railway companies upon the subject, and ascertain what objection there was to allowing the doors to remain unlocked.
SIR WILLIAM GALLWEYsaid, he hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would consider the question as a representation.

SUPPLY.
Order for Committee read.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."

IRELAND—THE CONSTABULARY.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  MR. BLAKEsaid, he rose to call the attention of the Chief Secretary for Ireland to the general practice which prevails on the part of the Constabulary in handcuffing all prisoners in their custody on their way to and from the place of detention, and to inquire whether he would have any objection to suggest to the Inspector General of Constabulary the desirability of issuing an order to the force under his command to make some relaxation in the practice of handcuffing in the case of persons charged with trivial offences when no apprehension is entertained of resistance or rescue being attempted. He was induced to bring the subject forward, not only from what he witnessed himself, but also from representations which had been made to him of the unnecessary manner in which the Irish constabulary frequently employed handcuffs in the case of persons of general good character charged with trivial offences. Such provision was very properly given them to prevent escape or violence on the part of the prisoner, and when any apprehension was entertained of a rescue being attempted, and the precaution was a very proper one in all cases of persons charged with or convicted of serious offences; but in a great number of instances the Irish police handcuffed parties after conviction guilty of some very trifling offence, for which, probably, the magistrates had inflicted some small fine or short period of imprisonment—twenty-four or forty-eight hours. He had often seen young innocent country lads, who for some little row at a fair or race-course might have to undergo a short term in prison, brought away from the sessions court manacled to old offenders convicted of some serious offence. Very often, also, persons before trial were handcuffed on their way to sessions, who, from the trifling nature of their offence, could have no object in trying to escape from custody. He had often also heard persons of really good character who got into some little trouble plead most imploringly to the police, but in vain, not to disgrace them by handcuffing when it was

  1339
  certain they would have gone quietly to prison. He had taken some trouble to ascertain from Inspectors of Police in England whether the handcuffs were employed to the same extent as in Ireland, and found they were not used at all so often—indeed, some of the police authorities expressed the utmost surprise at the cases which he mentioned to them that he had seen them employed. Some English police officers told him that when occasionally men who formerly belonged to the Irish constabulary joined their force that they had to restrain them from the too frequent use of handcuffs, owing to the habit they had acquired of resorting to them on occasions in Ireland which would not be tolerated in England. He could assure the right hon. Baronet that the humble classes in Ireland were particularly sensitive of such an outrage; the practice was calculated frequently to cause a feeling of degradation, and lead to recklessness on the part of those who, if not thus outraged, might never commit a second offence; but when exposed to public view, manacled perhaps to a thief, their self-respect would be gone for ever. It was a bad policy to do anything needlessly in Ireland calculated to cause animosity against the law or the police—there was nothing, he believed, more likely to do it than the practice alluded to—and he earnestly appealed to the good sense and good feeling of the right hon. Baronet to suggest to the Inspector General to direct that greater discretion should be used by the police in future in the use of handcuffs, especially in the instance of persons charged with trifling offences.
  MR. WHITESIDEsaid, before the right hon. Baronet answered the Question he wished to ask him if he would interfere and prevent the searching of female prisoners charged with petty thefts at the police-station. A female who had stolen a pair of boots in Dublin was apprehended with the boots in her hand, and when taken to the station she was stripped and searched by the female searcher. He thought the practice very objectionable, except in extreme cases.
  SIR HUGH CAIRNSsaid, he wished to call the attention of the right hon. Baronet to another matter intimately connected with the constabulary. The right hon. Baronet might not be able then to give him a distinct reply, but, perhaps, he would promise to inquire into it, as it had reference to the manner in which the police
  1340
  got up complaints. The matter to which he was about to refer had undergone investigation before the stipendiary magistrate at Belfast. A very respectable tradesman was proceeding to his house of business along a footpath, where two members of the constabulary force were lounging against a wall and obstructing a little the way. It never entered into the mind of this gentleman to offer any violence to either of them, but he touched the leg of one of them in order to pass. The constables thereupon arrested the gentleman at once, and, as they admitted, used most vituperative language. This occurred on the Saturday afternoon, and the gentleman was placed in confinement and kept there for thirty-six hours, when he was brought on the following Monday before the magistrates, and charged with assaulting the constables. After investigating the charge, the magistrates came to the conclusion that there was no ground whatever for preferring the charge of assault; that no assault or violence of any description had been committed by the gentleman; but, on the contrary, they stated that the conduct of the constabulary was most improper, on their own showing. Well, the charge was, of course, dismissed. Thereupon the gentleman who had been thus injured, sent a statement of the facts of his case to the Inspector of the Constabulary in Dublin, and called upon him, as the head of the force, to express his opinion officially upon them, and to take the proper steps to prevent a recurrence of such a proceeding. The answer which the gentleman received was to the following effect:—
  "In acknowledging the receipt of your letter of the 24th of May, I regret much to find that it contains a complaint against the conduct of the police; but as it is not one against their discipline, I can only suggest, if you consider yourself aggrieved, that you are at liberty to take such legal steps as you may be advised,"—
  meaning, as he (Sir Hugh Cairns) supposed, a civil action at law against the offending constables. Let hon. Members imagine what would be said in this country if such a case had occurred in London, if some member of the metropolitan police force had treated a gentleman in the same way as the Dublin police had treated the person referred to, and that Sir Richard Mayne, when applied to for redress, had written a similar letter as the Chief Inspector of the Irish Constabulary had penned? "I leave you to consult your attorney, and to bring a civil action for the injury you

  1341
  have sustained." It was, he might add, of the utmost importance that confidence in the constabulary force in Ireland, which was so numerous, and which had so much of a military character, should be maintained, and he, therefore, hoped the Chief Secretary for Ireland would have inquiry instituted into the circumstances which he had brought under his notice.
  MR. HENNESSYobserved, that such statements as those which had been made by his hon. Friend near him would hardly be altogether new to the Secretary for the Home Department, inasmuch as several members of the Irish constabulary force had been draughted into the London metropolitan police, and were at once checked by their superior officers whenever they resorted to such practices as they had been in the habit of adopting in Ireland. He had risen, however, chiefly to ask whether, inasmuch as the old law under which a man was liable to seven years' penal servitude for begging in Ireland had been repealed by an Act passed in the present Session, a man named Doyle, who had a short time ago been sentenced to penal servitude under that law, would have the clemency of the Crown exercised in his case, and have his sentence remitted? As to the Irish constabulary, he believed them to be a most admirable force, and that any charges which might be brought against them were to be attributed to the authorities at Dublin Castle, by whom the j most arbitrary and harsh instructions were issued to the force.
  SIR ROBERT PEEL, in answer to the hon. and learned Member for the King's County (Mr. Hennessy), said, it was the intention of the Government to recommend the remission of the sentence of the person to whom he referred, as having been found guilty of begging under a law now re-pealed. In reply to the statement of the hon. and learned Member for Belfast (Sir Hugh Cairns), he might observe that he thought the case which he had brought under his notice well worthy of consideration, and he should take care that it was duly investigated. He was of opinion that the Irish constabulary endeavoured upon the whole to discharge their difficult duties with great forbearance and moderation, although no doubt there were some instances in which their conduct stood in need of correction. He presumed that the letter which the hon. and learned Gentleman had read was written by Colonel Wood [Sir Hugh CAIRNS: Yes], and he should
  1342
  at once inquire into the matter to which it related. The remarks made by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Dublin (Mr. Whiteside) had reference to the Dublin metropolitan police, which was a force entirely distinct from the constabulary; but he should write to the Commissioners on the subject of those remarks and take care that it was duly investigated. In answer to the hon. Member for Waterford (Mr. Blake) who had placed in his hands that morning a letter from the mayor of that city, alleging certain cases of hardship on the part of the constabulary, he had simply to say that the instructions issued to them enjoined on them the necessity of being as lenient as possible in the treatment of the prisoners committed to their charge. Those instructions might, of course, be infringed in particular cases, and he should take care when such cases were brought before him, as in the present instance, that they should be inquired into. He must, at the same time, remark that one of the constabulary regulations was, that although all rational allowance was to be made for the feelings of prisoners, yet that they might be handcuffed when to do so was necessary to their safe custody, as when a prisoner stood charged with any serious offence, and there was reason to apprehend that an attempt at rescue would be made. Those, however, were only extreme eases, and he was bound to say that he did not think the sweeping charges made by the hon. Gentleman would be exactly borne out.

THE LATE RAILWAY ACCIDENT.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  SIR LAWRENCE PALKsaid, he rose, pursuant to notice, to call attention to the fatal accident on the Great Western Railway, and to ask the President of the Board of Trade, if the Government will make inquiries with the view of ascertaining whether the safety of the public may not be better assured by legislative measures? He did not propose to go into the great question of general railway policy, but would confine himself to the consideration of the accidents which had occurred recently on the Great Western Railway, by which many lives were lost, and a great many persons seriously injured, and to the recommendations of the Committee which sat in 1858 to inquire into the subject of railway accidents. That Committee, in their Report, made two suggestions. Now,

  1343
  he thought, that he should be able to show that if these suggestions had been carried into effect in all human probability neither of those accidents on the Great Western Railway would have happened. The recommendations of the Committee were; first, that it should be imperative upon every railway company to establish a means of communication between the guards and the engine-drivers; secondly, that telegraphic communication should be established along the lines of railway, and the despatch of trains should be telegraphed from station to station. These were their main recommendations. As to the first, he had never heard any good reason assigned why a means of communication might not be established between guards and engine-drivers. On the continental railways the guards were able to pass along the sides of the carriages, and were able to see what was going on in each compartment at all times by day and night, and to communicate readily with the engine-drivers. He knew no reason why the same system should not he adopted in England; he had, indeed, heard that our stations were so constructed that it would be impossible to widen the platforms sufficiently to enable guards to pass with safety from one carriage to another. Even if that were the case, he thought it was the bounden duty of the Board of Trade, without interfering with the management of railways, to take such precautions as would ensure the safety of the passengers, and put a stop to those lamentable accidents which seemed to be very much on the increase, and to become more disastrous in the circumstances with which they were attended. If there were a difficulty in the widening of the platforms the companies should be compelled to surmount it. The railway interest was a vast monopoly. The companies having taking upon themselves* the whole carrying trade of the country were bound to furnish the public with all the means of safety that could be obtained by prudent management. As to the second recommendation of the Committee of 1858, he thought he should be able to prove that if a proper telegraphic communication along the line had been established the disaster which had lately occurred at Rednall, on the Shrewsbury and Chester branch of the Great Western, would not have happened. [The hon. Baronet read from The Times newspaper portions of their account of this accident, and of the letter of "An Eye Witness."] It was apparent from these statements that
  1344
  want of punctuality, which seemed an indigenous vice in all railways, was the proximate cause of this disaster. In this accident the lives of between 800 and 900 individuals were placed in the greatest possible peril by this want of punctuality. The public had a right, therefore, to demand of the Board of Trade to enforce upon the railway companies the necessity of observing accuracy of time in the dispatch of trains. Recollecting, however, what took place at the commencement of the Session in reference to this subject, he was afraid that there was no inclination on the part of Her Majesty's Government to take steps to enforce the observance of those rules. When the Board of Trade was pressed upon this point, the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Milner Gibson) entered into a series of statistics to prove that very few deaths occurred in proportion to the number of passengers by railways throughout the year. Now it did not appear to him (Sir Lawrence Palk) that that was the point in question. The question really was, could railway travelling be made perfectly safe by proper regulations enforced by the Board of Trade. That was a question which the country bad a right to demand. He came now to another accident of recent occurrence on the Great Western Railway, and it was a remarkable fact that within the last year or two the accidents on the Great Western Railway and its tributaries bad become much more frequent than heretofore. How to account for this he could not say. He could only suggest that the servants of that company must be overworked, their engines worn out, or that proper precautions were not taken in the interests of the public. In this accident, which occurred between Sal-ford and Keynsham, some five or six miles from Bristol, a stoppage took place, and the train was run into from behind by a fast train. The doors were locked on both sides, a proceeding which was contrary to law, and the passengers begged the guard to open them; but this was not done, the driver hoping to attain speed sufficient to get away from the approaching train. A commercial traveller in the last compartment, having a carriage key in his possession, opened the door, and with his immediate companions leapt on to the embankment, the narrowness of his escape being shown by the fact that a bandbox remaining on the very seat where he had been sitting was flattened like a piece of board

  1345
  by the concussion. He contended that it was the duty of the railway companies to surround the public travelling by their lines with every possible security, and, in providing those safeguards, that price ought not to be considered. If the railways of their own motion would not, take the necessary steps, it was the duty of the Government, and the duty of that House, to see whether further legislation might not prove instrumental in lessening, if not in preventing, those frightful instances of loss of life and mutilation which now were of such frequent occurrence. It would not do for the right hon. Gentleman to get up in his place and say that, considering the number of passengers conveyed by railways, there were very few persons killed or injured. The hon. Baronet, in conclusion, asked the President of the Board of Trade, in the terms of his notice, If the Government will make inquiries with the view of ascertaining whether the safety of the public may not be better assured by legislative measures?
  MR. MILNER GIBSONsaid, he quite concurred with the hon. Baronet in thinking that all possible precautions ought to be taken to prevent accidents such as he had described; but it did not follow that the remedies for the evils of which he complained were to be found in the clauses of an Act of Parliament. There were other ways of bringing about the practical results at which he aimed, and which were more likely to be successful than any attempt at legislation upon the management of railway travelling. The Act which was passed some years ago making railway companies responsible in damages for injuries caused by accidents increased the other inducements which existed to make the railway authorities adopt the best means for preventing these lamentable occurrences. The late accident was a most appalling event, but he really did not know how it could have been prevented by legislation. The facts were imperfectly known as yet, but the accident would appear to have arisen from the negligence of the platelayers in lifting the plates without taking proper precautions. [Sir LAWRENCE PALK: The train was an hour late.] The Report forwarded to the Government attributed the accident to the plate-layers; but an Inspector had been sent down to the spot to inquire into the case, and no doubt the whole truth would be ascertained. Meanwhile, he repeated that he did not know how legislation could have prevented the
  1346
  accident. Looking at the enormous number of persons employed on the different railway systems, and the importance of every individual in his own particular branch attending to his duty punctually and faithfully on all occasions, it is not surprising that accidents did sometimes occur, depending, as they were obliged to do, to such an extent on human machinery, which was never infallible. The object was to employ as efficient persons as could be found under proper regulations. By making the employers responsible for the acts of their servants through the heavy damages whenever casualties occurred, the strongest possible obligation was placed upon railway directors to be careful in the selection of their servants, employing only respectable men, whose mental and physical powers were likely to make them good and faithful servants. He agreed with the hon. Baronet (Sir Lawrence Palk) in thinking that there ought to be communication between the guard and engine-driver; and this was actually in operation, he believed, on some of the principal lines. [Sir LAWRENCE PALK: Not on the Great Western] The Great Western Company had undertaken to introduce the communication after a plan of their own; but he believed the hon. Baronet was right in stating that on a great number of their trains it was not in operation. He believed it was not to be done by any mechanical means, but by placing some person in the train in such a position that he could catch the driver's attention. He had no hesitation in saying, as far as his own opinion and the opinion of the Inspectors of the Board of Trade were concerned, there was no mechanical difficulty in the way, and that communication between the guard and the driver might be adopted in all trains. He believed, also, that telegraphing was adopted to some extent. ["No!"]—he did not say universally, and that all the means which had been suggested for securing the safety of passengers were in process of adoption. It seemed, therefore, that the two recommendations of the Select Committee were in process of adoption, and it was not necessary to legislate on the subject, nor did he know what more the Government could do than they had already done. The present practice was, that when an accident took place a competent and disinterested person was sent to the spot to inquire into the cause. A Report was made which was laid before the House and published,

  1347
  and the public opinion of the country was thus brought to bear on the railway companies. If, when the cause of the accident was clearly pointed out, the companies failed to take steps to prevent similar occurrences in future, in case of injury to person or loss of life the damages might be proportionately increased. The hon. Baronet would probably be of opinion that the Commission might also inquire into the means of securing greater punctuality in the arrival and departure of trains. Under all the circumstances, then, it would be premature to engage to legislate on the subject. He believed that all the precautions which had been recommended ought to be adopted, and would be adopted; and from all he could hear the companies would go even further than to secure the communication between driver and guard, and would establish communication between passengers and guard. Papers would very shortly be laid before the House, and then hon. Members could judge whether railway companies were serious in endeavouring this time to adopt those means of communication which were so much desired.
  SIR LAWRENCE PALK: With regard to the doors being locked?
  MR. MILNER GIBSONsaid, he knew nothing except what appeared in the newspaper report.
  SIR LAWRENCE PALK: Is it legal?
  MR. MILNER GIBSONsaid, he did not know. He could not say at that moment. There might be a clause in some of the Acts of Parliament which forbade both doors being locked, and he was of opinion that both doors ought not to be locked.

ST. JAMES'S PARK.—QUESTION.
SIR WILLIAM FRASERsaid, that when permission to go through St. James's Park was given to hackney carriages a great boon was conferred on the public, and that permission had been largely made use of, particularly since the opening of the Victoria Station. There were, however, about twenty days in the year upon which St. James's Park was closed to public conveyances, either in the morning or evening—as, for instance, when drawing rooms and levees were being held and when balls were given. Such was the case yesterday. A considerable number of persons on arriving at the Park gates were told that they could not go through, and they were obliged to go round by another way, thus losing much of their
1348
time. He wished to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether, on occasion of the Park of St. James or other Royal parks being shut to vehicles, he will cause a printed notice to be posted at all Hackney Carriage Stands, and will order Police Constables to be placed at a convenient distance from the Park gates, to inform the public of the closing of the Park?
SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, that St. James's Park was never closed for the whole day, but only for a small portion of it, during a drawing-room or levee, when, of course, an accumulation of vehicles would produce great inconvenience. But the notice suggested was already given. Not only a day, but some days beforehand, large placards were posted giving directions as to the routes which carriages were to take, and notice that St. James's would be closed to ordinary vehicles during certain hours. All drivers of cabs, therefore, might be aware of the fact, and have no excuse if they did not know of the temporary closing of the route. With regard to the suggestion that policemen should be stationed at particular places he would consult the Chief Commissioner on the subject and see whether that could be done with a view to afford the fullest information to the public.
Motion, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair," put, and agreed to.

SUPPLY—CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES—Considered in Committee.
SUPPLY—CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES.

  CLASS IV,—EDUCATION, SCIENCE, AND ART.
  (In the Committee.)
  (1.) £63,164, to complete the sum for the British Museum.
  MR. WALPOLEsaid, that the Vote which had been just put from the Chair was the difference between the money voted on account and the sum asked for in the Estimates, and he now rose to make the short statement usually made by Gentlemen who had the honour to fill the position which he now held. The Committee would observe, if they looked to the end of the Estimate, that between the sum voted in 1864–5 and that asked for 1865–6, there was a difference of £8,037, being an increase to that amount in the Estimate of the current year. This Estimate branched off into different portions—one relating to salaries, another to house expenses, a third to ordinary purchases, a fourth to extra-

  1349
  ordinary or special purchases, another to bookbinding and printing of catalogues, and another to buildings. The Committee would find an increase upon salaries and upon special purchases and catalogues, to both of which subjects he would presently call attention; but under some of the other heads the amount remained the same, under others there was a considerable decrease. The main increase was in the special purchases, and that was to be attributed to the fact that while last year only £2,200 was voted for that purpose, this year the item would amount to £7,600. Last year £500 was voted for excavations at Budrum; £1,000 for collections of human and animal remains, &c, from the South of France; and £700 for an antique bronze lamp found in Paris; making in all, under the head of special purchases, £2,200. This year the special purchases recommended to the Treasury would consist of some very valuable additions. The first sum under this head—£2,000—was to complete the purchase of five houses, so as to enable the excavations at Bud-rum to be continued under the superintendence of Vice Consul Billiotti, with a view to the recovery of large portions of the remainder of the tomb of Mausolus. It would add materially to a really valuable work if the expectations of the Trustees were realized by finding a great many interesting fragments of that tomb. Then, there was another item for the purchase of the most valuable mineral collection of Colonel Kokschakoff, of St. Petersburgh, consisting of specimens found in Siberia, and the North of Europe, for which £1,600 had been given; and he was told—for he spoke not from his own knowledge, but from the information of others—that that purchase, added to previous purchases, had actually made our mineralogical collection one of the best in the world. Then, a still larger sum was asked for the purchase of certain articles in two great collections which were offered for sale during the current year—the one was the Pourtales and the other the St. Angelo collection. With regard to the Pourtales collection, instead of frittering away the money at their disposal in the purchase of many small articles, the Trustees determined to expend the larger amount in the purchase of that which was recognized as a chef d'œuvre, the head of Apollo. That work of art, with some others, was accordingly secured for the Museum. The St. Angelo collection was
  1350
  bought in, and consequently the £2,000 which the Government sanctioned for that purchase would no longer be required, and the Vote put from the Chair would to that extent be reduced. As to the increase in the other items of the Museum Estimate, the most important was in the catalogue, which had been defective in two important particulars. The Hebrew books in the library were ill catalogued, and those gentlemen—no doubt they were not very numerous—who applied their studies in that direction, found it a matter of primary importance that there should be a good catalogue of those books. For that purpose £400 was taken in the Estimates, and £800 for catalogues, drawings, and engravings, of and from the coins and medals. If this latter work could be well accomplished, the result would be a valuable addition to the materials for history—because there was hardly any illustration of historical events so accurate as that which is supplied by coins and medals. During the year additions had been made to the Museum in all its departments, but three of these deserved special attention. In the department of Sculpture the Trustees had not only secured the head of Apollo, which he had just mentioned, but also a figure of Mercury, and an admirable copy from that which was believed to be a work of Polycleitus. So much for the antiquities. As to the Numismatic department, it was his pleasing duty to acquaint the House that last autumn Mr. Edward Wigan had made a munificent offer to the Trustees of a choice collection of antique gold coins, running over all the periods of the Empire, from the first Cesar to the last. Every one of these coins was in the most perfect preservation, and no fewer than 223 of them were coins which were not before in the Museum. The value of this collection was estimated at between £5,000 and £6,000. The Natural History department was a very extensive one, but hitherto it had been deficient in specimens of the Natural History of the Holy Land. Recently, however, great exertions had been made to get from the lakes and seas of that part of the world specimens of the fishes. Collections of the birds and animals from Palestine were also being made, and those additions illustrative of the natural history of the Bible were most interesting to all; for all have an interest in that which throws light on the history or production of that sacred country. He did not think he had anything more to add upon these Estimates,

  1351
  which were prepared with a view to make the Museum one of the most complete and valuable institutions of the kind in existence, and the only question that could arise was whether the Trustees were justified in adding to the collection to the extent of the additions made in the course of the last few years, when there was not the accommodation which he had often had occasion to deplore, and which he still did deplore as totally insufficient for the proper exhibition of them. Upon that point, he had only to say that if the opportunity of making these purchases were let slip, it probably never would occur again; and he thought, therefore, that the Trustees would be neglecting their duty if they did not take advantage of such opportunities. With regard to the accommodation, that is a subject which would properly come before the House upon a distinct Motion. The Trustees had constantly applied to the Treasury for the means of providing adequate accommodation for these magnificent collections. He would not now enlarge upon the difficulties which had arisen upon this point during the last five or six years—difficulties beyond those, perhaps, which had been apparent to the House. At the present moment, certain plans had been sent by the Government to the Trustees for lodging the Natural History collection separate from the other collections. Of those plans one was approved by the Trustees as being the most suitable, but the Government, on consideration, thought that another would be better amalgamated with the first, and that question would be determined at a conference which would take place next week, between the Trustees and the Chief Commissioner of Works. He hoped and believed that the Committee would not object to the Vote which he had the honour to propose, and next year he trusted that the new Parliament would take in hand the all-important question of additional space for the proper exhibition of these collections, and that the Government would be ready with plans which might receive the sanction of the House.
  MR. AYRTONthought that the Trustees were be wrapped in the affairs of antiquity that they neglected considerations applicable to the present day. It would be much better if, instead of directing their attention to collecting the remains of the Mausoleum, they would turn it to the relations of the Museum to the British public. It was undoubtedly desirable that
  1352
  the Museum should be a choice collection, interesting to persons of high education, and gifted with a knowledge of art; but it was also desirable that the Museum should interest comparatively uneducated people, and unfortunately the Trustees kept it shut during that part of the day when the largest number of people could alone visit it. He wished to know whether the Trustees could not arrange for the opening of the Museum in the evening, as was done at South Kensington. He could not understand why they should have one Department of the Government declaring that it was quite practicable to open for public view collections in the evening without risk, and another Department declaring that such a proceeding was fraught with the utmost danger. He should be glad to know whether the Trustees of the British Museum had considered this matter during the past year, and he also desired to learn whether they had taken any steps to secure ground around the British Museum from the ground landlord so as to admit of the extension of the building in future. It was to be deplored that the question had remained open so long, because the sooner it was dealt with the greater would be the economy to the public, and the nobleman to whom the property in that neighbourhood belonged would, no doubt, be prepared, if properly approached, to deal with the matter as one of national interest and in a way becoming his high station. Any immediate sacrifice in giving ground for the extension of the British Museum would in the end have the effect of generally improving the value of the adjoining land.
  MR. GREGORYwished to know if the Government intended to propose any plan or to take any steps whatever to remove the Natural History collection from Blooms-bury to some other place. As to the question of duplicates, Mr. Panizzi was of opinion that in respect to books there were but very few, and there were objections to part with them, and he (Mr. Gregory) would not, therefore, raise any question as to them; but as regarded the duplicates of works of art and antiquities the Museums of Dublin and Edinburgh, and, indeed, others in the United Kingdom, would be glad to profit by them. This was not only his own opinion, for Professor Owen had distinctly told him that he could make up from the chaos of specimens now in the British Museum collections which would be extremely valuable to local institutions in the country. As far as Dublin was con-

  1353
  cerned, he knew they would be received with thankfulness. If the Royal Dublin Society was not considered a national institution these specimens might be lent to it, or if sufficiently national handed over to it, and the general advantage would he so great that he should be glad to know if the Government since he had last mentioned the subject had taken it into consideration. The articles discovered in Camirus were numerous and interesting, and specimens would he thankfully received by the local institution.
  MR. WATKINsaid, it was a somewhat startling fact that notwithstanding the increase of the population of London and the greater influx of strangers, the number of visitors to the British Museum appeared to be falling off. He thought it was incumbent on the Government and the Trustees to show that this arose from no want of proper accommodation. In 1859 the total number admitted to view the general collection, exclusive of readers, was 517,000; in 1860 it was 536,000; in 1861 the number was 641,000; in 1862, which was an exceptional year, as it was the period of the Great Exhibition, the number was 895,000; but in 1863 and 1864 it was only 440,000 and 432,000 respectively. Those figures showed that there must be some reason why only so small a portion of the people resorted to so useful and glorious an institution. With respect to the working classes, it was only those out of employment that could visit the British Museum during the hours it was open, and to the employed working people the place was practically closed. Surely there might be arrangements made whereby the admission of the working classes might he made real instead of nominal.
  SIR HARRY VERNEYsaid, he would be extremely glad to hear that the Government would take into consideration the suggestion of the hon. and learned Member for the Tower Hamlets. If property were taken for the increase of the British Museum the houses might be let until their space was wanted. There would thus be no immediate loss; and he also thought that the question should be considered whether the British Museum might not be opened at hours when the working classes of the metropolis could visit the admirable collections which it contained.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that with respect to the question of opening the British Museum at
  1354
  evening hours, when it might become a place of general resort for the working classes, he was bound to declare that too much responsibility ought not to be laid on the Trustees of the British Museum. He considered that the duties of a body like the Trustees had much more reference to the general good government and discipline of the institution, to the progressiv extension of its collections, and to the improvement of the general rules on the present basis for the admission of the public, than to the introduction of any fundamental change or reconstruction of the system at a large expense to the public. He did not say this in order to make light of the observations of the hon. and learned Member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ayrton), for he frankly owned that the more he considered the question of opening these public institutions the more he was driven towards—he did not say to, but towards—the conclusion that evening openings involved not a portion but the whole of the subject as regards the mass of the population. The great collections of the country could hardly be said to exist for the great mass of the population. On the other hand, the question was a very large one. It was not merely a question of a certain addition to the present establishments, but it involved considerations of the greatest importance with regard to the improvements which might be requisite in the building, both there, at the National Gallery, and elsewhere, in order to give complete security to the collections in the event of their being opened in the evening. It was not the British Museum only that was concerned, but likewise other public institutions; and it would become necessary to have the matter very carefully examined by Parliament to ascertain what measures and what expense would be needed to secure to the mass of the population of London that great boon—a boon which did not involve so much the extension of the Museum as their admission to it, because it amounted at present very much to a question of their practical exclusion. The hon. and learned Member for the Tower Hamlets wished to know whether any overtures had been made to the Duke of Bedford with a view to the enlargement of the Museum on its present site. His hon. Friend was exceedingly sanguine on that subject, and took a rather romantic view of the position of that nobleman. His Grace, however, and those who managed his estates, must be aware not only that

  1355
  that question had been in agitation for many years, but that one of the main reasons for the abandonment some time ago of the idea of an indefinite extension of the institution on the present site was the great cost of the ground, and that a body of the Trustees which considered the matter framed an Estimate which put the expense of such an extension at about £50,000 per acre for the land. These facts being notorious they had certainly no indication of any disposition on the part of the great neighbouring proprietor to accept less than the fair market price for his land if required for the purposes of the British Museum. Nor, indeed, had the public the smallest claim upon him to do so. True, his hon. Friend thought the extension of the Museum would enhance the value of the rest of his Grace's adjacent property; but that was only an opinion, the truth of which was not at all self-evident. At any rate, if the House decided that there should be a large addition to the British Museum on the present site, they must not assume that they would be able to purchase the ground under the exceptionally favourable circumstances imagined by the hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets. But the question was not one that could be wisely opened at that moment; and, moreover, he was inclined to be altogether sceptical as to the doctrine intimated on that and other occasions by his hon. Friend—namely, that, in the case of an establishment like the British Museum, originally of moderate dimensions, and comprising a great many branches, some of them not bound by any very natural or close relations to each other, no matter what might be the increased population or the altered circumstances of that metropolis, they were to go on making vast and indefinite extensions on the present site. He was not going back to any question about South Kensington, which was not then before them. They had contracted engagements as to South Kensington, and at the proper time the House would have to consider whether any and what measures should be taken in respect to those engagements. But he now contested the doctrine of an indefinite extension of that institution on that one spot, and thought it extremely doubtful whether by that plan they would give the greatest command of those collections to the vast and growing population of London and to the increasing stream of visitors constantly flowing into it. He did not believe it would
  1356
  be right to say to the people of that metropolis and the public generally, "Whatever facilities of access or otherwise may be given to another site which may not be partaken of by the present site, whatever may be the future extension of London—an extension which, though long begun, is probably far from ended—whatever changes time may produce, we shall tie you down to this particular spot, and if you want to see an establishment containing antiquities, works of art, and specimens of natural history, hither shall you come, and hither only, be your place of abode three, or five, or seven miles distant." The principle of diffusion, reasonably applied, within certain proper and well defined limits, appeared to him on the face of it a more rational principle than that laid down by his hon. Friend. With regard to the question put by the hon. Member for Galway (Mr. Gregory) as to whether it was in the power of the Government to submit a proposal to the House for affording increased accommodation for the Natural History Collection, the Department over which his right hon. Friend near him (Mr. Cowper) presided had not yet been able to arrive, in communication with the Trustees of the Museum, at such an understanding with reference to any building to be erected on a new site as would justify the Government in coming with plans before the House. It might be possible, physically speaking, for them to do so before the present Session ended; hut he did not think it would he convenient to have a question of that kind decided at any period except when the House was fully attended, and able to give it that amount of attention which it undoubtedly required. They had not made any overtures to the Duke of Bedford, and he was very doubtful about the expediency of making them. A plan by which the Government should purchase property covered with houses and remain the owner or lessor of those houses, applying from time to time such portions of their sites as might be thought fit for the purposes of the British Museum, was one of the worst species of administrative arrangements he had ever heard proposed. Whatever plausible arguments might be urged in its favour would not stop with the case of the British Museum; but if the Government were to become speculators in house property, buying up houses before it actually wanted them, in order to get them cheaper there would not be ten,

  1357
  or twenty, or even fifty instances only in which they would have to consider the application of that principle. No doubt the State might often make economical investments of that kind; but he did not think it desirable that it should assume the position of temporary landlord without having a fit organization for discharging such duties. In his opinion the best and wisest course was for the Government, as a general rule, to buy the land which it wanted and at the time when it wanted it. With respect to the figures adduced by the hon. Member for Stockport (Mr. Watkin) as to the decreasing attendance at the British Museum, he confessed that they were not without significance in another point of view besides that from which the hon. Gentleman had quoted them; but the fact that there was such a falling off in the numbers resorting to that institution at a period when the Trustees were showing every anxiety to improve the general arrangements for the convenience of the public, and when, moreover, the visitors to the metropolis were increasing in a rapid ratio from year to year, in his mind did something to qualify the very sanguine estimates formed by some hon. Gentlemen as to the paramount and extraordinary advantages of the present site of that establishment.
  MR. WALPOLEsaid, he entirely concurred in what had fallen from the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to the inexpediency of bringing forward at the end of an expiring Parliament any plan for the decision of the important question as to the future distribution and management of the collections at the Museum, which must raise a good deal of discussion. The Government, he thought, had acted wisely in postponing the consideration of what should be the mode of providing that accommodation until the commencement of next Parliament. Meanwhile, he hoped the Trustees and the Government would arrive at some definite plan. Whatever his own individual opinion might be, he should feel it his duty to support the plan which might be agreed upon by the Trustees. The hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets had very naturally returned to the charge which he has often made before—namely, that the working classes in the metropolis should be enabled to see more of the collections at the Museum than they could now do. Similar observations had been made the other night with respect to the National Gallery, and the
  1358
  Chief Commissioner of Works then made what he (Mr. Walpole) thought a very sensible, pertinent, and forcible observation, which was equally applicable to the British Museum. He did not despair, he said, among all the improvements going on in this age, that means might be found to prevent the deleterious effects of the effluvium from gas; but till those means had been discovered he thought the Trustees would be guilty of a breach of duty if they consented to expose the valuable collections intrusted to their care to such peril as it was admitted they would incur by being exhibited in gas light. Nor is it to be forgotten that the risks of fire would be dangerously increased. The time might arrive when they would be enabled to reduce these risks to a minimum, and he should then be extremely glad if the hon. Member's views could be realized with safety. He must also warn the House, that if the Museum were lit by gas, they would have to consider the necessity of doubling the expense. His own notion was that, looking to the early closing movement on Saturday, and the holyday usually taken on Monday by many of the working artizans, arrangements might be made on those two days for more effectually enabling such persons as were employed in hard labour during the greater part of the week to go and see the Museum than they could by opening it on the Sunday evening, or at a later hour on weekday evenings. Three or four years ago the experiment was tried of keeping open the Museum till eight o'clock on Saturday night in the belief that great numbers would attend; hut the failure was complete, and it was not worth while to continue the experiment. With respect to opening the Museum on Sunday, this was not the time for offering any opinion upon it. That was a question for the House to determine, in connection with a variety of important considerations which could not be overlooked. The hon. Member for Galway (Mr. Gregory) had referred to the subject of duplicates, a matter undoubtedly of very great importance. The hon. Member said we had got plenty of duplicates; but the fact was that if by duplicates were meant identical articles, we had hardly any duplicates at all. There might, perhaps, be some duplicate volumes of books; but not so many as would at first sight appear. The supposed duplicates are often new editions; and it was of paramount importance to possess all the editions of interesting

  1359
  works, and the National Museum was the proper place where they ought to be collected. With regard to duplicates of sculpture we had very few of them; none of the fine works. There were, however, a good many things that might, perhaps, be parted with. The difficulty in doing so was the stringent character of the present Acts of Parliament. The Chancellor of the Exchequer would, he hoped, turn his mind to this point, namely, how far it would be advantageous to alter the present Acts so as to give, within certain limits, greater power of exchanging, selling, or parting with duplicates, or with things which were not wanted. That would be a very proper question to take up in connection with a Bill having reference to the management of the collections in the Museum. He did not know that he had omitted to notice any topic which had been suggested, and he hoped the House would now accede to the Vote.
  Vote agreed to.

  REVENUE DEPARTMENTS.
  (2.) £773,009, Customs Department.
  (3.) £1,284,157, Inland Revenue Department.
  (4.) £2,121,478, Post Office Department.
  COLONEL SYKEScomplained that many districts in the country were at present insufficiently accommodated by the Post Office. It appeared to him that the public requirements ought to be met before any revenue derived from the Post Office was considered disposable by the Exchequer.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERquite agreed with his hon. and gallant Friend that the wants of the public should be considered and that only the surplus should be treated as revenue; but those wants must mean the reasonable wants of the public. This was not so easy and simple a matter as might appear at first sight. It was necessary to do justice as between town and country. It was all very well for gentlemen who lived out of the way to say nothing was done for thinly peopled districts. But that must be taken with some limits. They levied taxation on the towns and spent it, not for the benefit of the thickly but of the thinly peopled districts. There was something in the sound, and, he might say, the flavour of his hon. and gallant Friend's observations that required a word of caution.
  MR. SCOURFIELDhoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would take into consideration what he had urged at an early period of the Session—the expediency of stating clearly in the little annual Abstract the exact amount of revenue and expenditure of the Post Office one year with another. There was a general idea that the revenue was much larger than that actually derived, and hence arose the increased applications which were made to Government on that account.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERunderstood the hon. Gentleman to refer to the quarterly Abstract laid on the table setting forth the Revenue and Expenditure of the country, and what was asked was that the revenue, instead of being stated in lump for all the Departments, should be separately exhibited at its actual amount for each. He thought the suggestion a useful one, and might tend to prevent misapprehension in the public mind.
  Vote agreed to.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £841,867, be granted to Her Majesty; to defray the Charge of the Post Office Packet Service which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1866; no part of which sum is to be applicable or applied in or towards making any payment in respect of any period subsequent to the 20th day of June 1863, to Mr. Joseph George Churchward, or to any person claiming through or under him by virtue of a certain Contract, bearing date the 26th day of April 1859, made between the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty's Admiralty (for and on behalf of Her Majesty) of the first part, and the said Joseph George Churchward of the second part, or in or towards the satisfaction of any claim whatsoever of the said Joseph George Churchward, by virtue of that Contract, so far as relates to any period subsequent to the 20th day of June 1803."
  MR. CRAWFORDsaid, he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of the Treasury for some information with reference to an application made to the Postmaster General by merchants and other persons connected with Eastern commerce upon the subject of the despatches conveyed from this country to the Eastern part of the world. That representation of the inconvenience attending the present system was made in the month of January last. The mails were now despatched, as regarded Marseilles, on the 3rd, 10th, 18th, and 26th of each month; but as those days fell, of course, on different days of the week, on some of which communi-

  1361
  cations could not be advantageously forwarded, the commercial world was not only exposed to great inconvenience, but to a considerable loss of time. It was of importance that the letters despatched from this country should convey intelligence up to the latest period; but the present arrangement altogether ignored the fact that certain days of the week might be regarded as dies non. On Saturday and Monday, for instance, but little business was transacted. The memorial to which he had referred had received the assent of almost every mercantile and banking establishment engaged in banking or exchange operations with the Eastern part of the world. The object of the representation was to obtain the sanction of the Government to the despatch of the mails on the Friday in every week instead of the present inconvenient arrangement, he had every reason to believe that this inconvenience was acknowledged by the Postmaster General; but to effect the change which was so unanimously desired, it was proposed to increase the postage of letters to India viâ Marseilles from the present rate of 10 d. to 16 d. So large an increase, however, appeared to be calculated to defeat the object which the memorialists had in view. He might add that the memorial presented to the Postmaster General had been warmly supported by the various Chambers of Commerce in India. He thought, however, that it was hardly fair that the whole of the charge consequent upon a new system of communication should be borne by those engaged in trade with India. In a couple of years' time, when the railway between Bombay and Calcutta will he completed, a portion of the subsidy paid to the Peninsular and Oriental Company might be dispensed with, and it was but fair that the Government, in endeavouring to give effect to the wishes of the memorialists, should bear this fact in mind. Australia, too, was much interested in this matter, and when the Government remembered the extent of our communication with that country, and the relations which existed in many instances between the lower classes, separated by so great a distance, it was all the more incumbent upon them to endeavour to remedy the defects in the present system. He should be glad to hear from the Secretary of the Treasury that the Government were prepared to deal with this question in a liberal spirit.
  MR. AYRTONsaid, he had been so struck
  1362
  with the defects of the present system and the necessity for a reorganization that he had given notice for the appointment of a Committee to inquire into the subject; but owing to the delay which attended the furnishing of the requisite papers and other circumstances, he had been unable to bring the subject under the consideration of the House. Even now, when the matter was mentioned in the House, he was sorry to find that the Secretary of State for India was in such a condition that he was unable to attend, and that they were, therefore, deprived of the opportunity of giving the subject that attention which it deserved. Though the remarks of the hon. Member for the City of London (Mr. Crawford) were perfectly just, he hardly thought that they went deep enough, for the whole system of communication was, in his opinion, eminently deficient from beginning to end. The communication was so slow as to be exceedingly discreditable to the Post Office and the Government. The communication between England and Bombay ought to be accelerated until the mails were conveyed in sixteen days. Every additional day only exhibited an incapacity on the part of the Government to grapple with the case. The right which some Continental States exercised of intercepting and levying tolls upon communications between neighbouring countries could not be viewed in any other light than as a remnant of the Middle Ages, when the barons regarded the pillage of merchants from their castles on the Rhine as their especial privilege. In this case no service was asked nor was any rendered. The utmost cost of conveying letters from Ostend to the remotest port of Europe must be less than a halfpenny per ounce, and that was the utmost sum which the Post Office ought to pay for the transport of letters from England to the shores of the Mediterranean, If the Post Office conducted its affairs in a spirit of intelligence, such as had marked some recent transactions in other public Departments, as in the case of the Commercial Treaty with France, negotiated by Mr. Cobden, the other States would not be allowed to levy a toll upon the boxes of letters passing through their limits. The present state of things was an illustration of the unsatisfactory condition of the Post Office Department, and how unfit it was to deal with great subjects. It was true that at present we were in a transition state as regarded our Indian communications, because of the changes which were occurring in the open-

  1363
  ing up of new Mediterranean ports; but he did not find that the Government had attempted to deal with the subject in a serious spirit. He might proceed to point out other defects, but he felt that the Government by delaying the production of papers had practically prevented the House from instituting that searching inquiry which was absolutely necessary, and he feared that they were endeavouring to stave off the difficulty for a time by arrangements which would ultimately be found to interfere with a permanent and satisfactory settlement of the question. When the Committee were told that the extravagant and almost prohibitory rates of postage to India which had been mentioned were necessary, he was convinced that the Government was not dealing with the subject in a satisfactory manner; as he was convinced that if it were considered in a comprehensive spirit a reduction and not an increase in the rates of postage would be practicable. As long as the present system of making arrangements of a limited character was adhered to so long the service would be costly and inefficient. Although they were daily hearing of vessels constructed to run sixteen or seventeen knots an hour, the vessels employed in the Bombay and Suez line, where speed was urgently needed, did not average above nine knots. That showed the necessity for inquiry; and although he had been foiled in the present Session, yet if he had the pleasure of sitting in that House in the next Parliament he would propose the Motion for a searching inquiry into the whole of this important subject. In con-
  1364
  nection with that subject, he might mention one matter which had an important bearing. While the Post Office was subsidizing a line of steamers to India, the Secretary of State for India was about to set up a rival line, and, of course, all the military and other servants of the Government, who would be passengers by those steamers, would be lost to the Peninsular and Oriental Company, who consequently would require a large amount of subsidy for the conveyance of the mails. Although prevented from pursuing this subject further in the present Session, he hoped that in the next Parliament a searching inquiry would be instituted, and he had no doubt the result would be to prove that the wishes of the hon. Member for London might be gratified without any loss to the country.
  COLONEL SYKESsaid, the Government had to provide transport to India for 7,000 troops annually for reliefs, and for a similar number returning home, besides invalids and time-expired men. The hon. and gallant Member was proceeding to comment upon the Secretary of State's plan for sending out troops to India by Government transports viâ Egypt when—
  Notice taken that 40 Members were not present,—Committee counted, and 40 Members not being present:
  Mr. Speaker resumed the Chair:—House counted, and 40 Members not being present:
  House adjourned at Nine o'clock, till Monday next